Dear stupid

The main discussion board for everything Tulane athletics related.
Post Reply
RWR
Swell
Posts: 2126
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:18 pm
Status: Offline

This was posted on the other site.

"My question to those with greater knowledge is how if the situation with Coach Toledo different than that of Larry Smith after the fourth year of his contract? When I entered as a freshman during 1979-80 school year, Tulane was ranked in the bottom 10, suffered four losing season, and hadn't beaten LSU since 1973. In that fifth year, Smith went 9-2, beat LSU, and went to the Liberty Bowl ranked 15th in the country.

For years, I believed that it takes five years for a football program to turn around, and the situation with Tulane is no different. Coach Toledo deserves the opportunity to have the fifth year, where there will be more upperclassmen, who are his players."

Smith went 9-2 in his 4th year.


User avatar
JTLiuzza
Swell
Posts: 1264
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:10 pm
Status: Offline

Good grief. That's what we're dealing with.

Here's what happened with Coach X almost 40 years ago, so we can reasonably expect the same to unfold now.

I don't know about you but I'm convinced. I retract everything I said about the Toledo extension being yet another in a long line of stupid Tulane decisions.

Unbelievable.
The second commandment has not been abrogated.
tnelly15
Riptide
Posts: 2525
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:53 pm
Status: Offline

RWR wrote: For years, I believed that it takes five years for a football program to turn around, .
Tommy Bowden, June Jones, and countless other coaches have proven this to be inaccurate. I wont get into the rest of his post.
User avatar
JTLiuzza
Swell
Posts: 1264
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:10 pm
Status: Offline

You gotta like what SMU did. They turned on a dime. Go from doormat to bowl win in two years and conference championship game in three years.
The second commandment has not been abrogated.
Pepper
Swell
Posts: 1449
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:38 pm
Status: Offline

Larry Smith had Lindy Infante, we have Dan Dodd. Just a little different.
"Purple & Gold? You look ridiculous!"-Johnny Be Good.
Fred Dowler
Riptide
Posts: 4716
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:33 pm
Status: Offline

It's a good question but beyond a doubt where the situation now is hugely different is that this was before all of the scandals of 1980's. There are light years and vast oceans of difference between what the coaches were allowed to do at recruiting time then and what they must adhere to now. and the story about the shoe box full of cash presented to Hot Rod? Don't anyone kid themselves for a second that phenomena like that were purely limited to the bball program. If anything there was much more that Tulane was trying to keep under wraps, when Eamon Kelly had the bball program serve as the sacrificial lamb in 1985, with the football program than with the bball program. And that's not even getting started with the issue of the University College and the fact that back then Tulane did go so far as to recruit junior college transfers and also with the coaches knowing that there would not be the obstacles involved with getting such athletes into school and having them be able to make progress in school once admitted that there are today.

And, if anything, the tenure of President Cowen has tightened things up even more.

And then that's not getting into the issue of facilities and schools investing huge dollars to attarct players where things in the college football world in general have changed mightily since the 1980's.

Forget about an on-campus stadium. What's holding the program back a whole lot more than that is the lack of an indoor football practice facility.

Ergo, when the pool to recruit from is larger it's much easier to engineer a turnaround and do it more quickly.
Tulane sports: small football stadium, very small basketball arena, w̶i̶n̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶g̶r̶a̶m̶s̶, h̶o̶n̶e̶s̶t̶y̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶a̶c̶c̶o̶u̶n̶t̶a̶b̶i̶l̶i̶t̶y̶ , but, hey, now there's tailgating.
User avatar
JTLiuzza
Swell
Posts: 1264
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:10 pm
Status: Offline

Agreed Fred.

And once again, look at SMU. They suffered a football death penalty around the same time. They recently decided to get over it.
The second commandment has not been abrogated.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Fred Dowler wrote:It's a good question but beyond a doubt where the situation now is hugely different is that this was before all of the scandals of 1980's. There are light years and vast oceans of difference between what the coaches were allowed to do at recruiting time then and what they must adhere to now. and the story about the shoe box full of cash presented to Hot Rod? Don't anyone kid themselves for a second that phenomena like that were purely limited to the bball program. If anything there was much more that Tulane was trying to keep under wraps, when Eamon Kelly had the bball program serve as the sacrificial lamb in 1985, with the football program than with the bball program. And that's not even getting started with the issue of the University College and the fact that back then Tulane did go so far as to recruit junior college transfers and also with the coaches knowing that there would not be the obstacles involved with getting such athletes into school and having them be able to make progress in school once admitted that there are today.

And, if anything, the tenure of President Cowen has tightened things up even more.

And then that's not getting into the issue of facilities and schools investing huge dollars to attarct players where things in the college football world in general have changed mightily since the 1980's.

Forget about an on-campus stadium. What's holding the program back a whole lot more than that is the lack of an indoor football practice facility.

Ergo, when the pool to recruit from is larger it's much easier to engineer a turnaround and do it more quickly.
This is all very true, but the problem is that the world has changed (and is continuing to change) during Cowen's tenure.

It used to be there were a handful of televised college football games and that was it. Now, every game is televised and the money has skyrocketed up. We're now at the point where more than 5% of the D-1A universities athletic departments are doing $100M in annual revenues and most are doing more than $40M. And that says nothing about the exposure and impact on donations.

This is a big business. Cowen doesn't get it and that's why he needs to get with the program or go.
RWR
Swell
Posts: 2126
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:18 pm
Status: Offline

Fred Dowler wrote:It's a good question but beyond a doubt where the situation now is hugely different is that this was before all of the scandals of 1980's. There are light years and vast oceans of difference between what the coaches were allowed to do at recruiting time then and what they must adhere to now. and the story about the shoe box full of cash presented to Hot Rod? Don't anyone kid themselves for a second that phenomena like that were purely limited to the bball program. If anything there was much more that Tulane was trying to keep under wraps, when Eamon Kelly had the bball program serve as the sacrificial lamb in 1985, with the football program than with the bball program. And that's not even getting started with the issue of the University College and the fact that back then Tulane did go so far as to recruit junior college transfers and also with the coaches knowing that there would not be the obstacles involved with getting such athletes into school and having them be able to make progress in school once admitted that there are today.

And, if anything, the tenure of President Cowen has tightened things up even more.

And then that's not getting into the issue of facilities and schools investing huge dollars to attarct players where things in the college football world in general have changed mightily since the 1980's.

Absolutely not true about the football program. Not one bit of evidence to support it. The record supports the restrictions that were in place and that nothing illegal was going on. As soon as Larry Smith's recruits were gone so was our winning. English got in JC's and he was gone in 2 years. Brown only lasted 3 years and never had a winning season. He manufactured a .500 record against a joke of a schedule. He did however raise the funds to get the Wilson Center built. We had no facilities.

Forget about an on-campus stadium. What's holding the program back a whole lot more than that is the lack of an indoor football practice facility.

Ergo, when the pool to recruit from is larger it's much easier to engineer a turnaround and do it more quickly.
I agree about the IPF being the most important need . It's also the most realistic. As for the size of the pool Toledo can get in anybody he wants. He has refused to use the exceptions available to the program.
RWR
Swell
Posts: 2126
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:18 pm
Status: Offline

This part of my post somehow wound up in Fred's quote.


Absolutely not true about the football program. Not one bit of evidence to support it. The record supports the restrictions that were in place and that nothing illegal was going on. As soon as Larry Smith's recruits were gone so was our winning. English got in JC's and he was gone in 2 years. Brown only lasted 3 years and never had a winning season. He manufactured a .500 record against a joke of a schedule. He did however raise the funds to get the Wilson Center built. We had no facilities.
User avatar
JTLiuzza
Swell
Posts: 1264
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:10 pm
Status: Offline

RWR wrote:Toledo can get in anybody he wants. He has refused to use the exceptions available to the program.
My understanding of why he doesn't use the exceptions is that there is no place for them to study and remain eligible, i.e. no "athletics friendly" majors. So given that, he considers it a waste of his limited recruiting resources to offer a scholarship to someone he figures won't be able to remain academically eligible anyway, and therefore won't see the field.

I could be wrong but that's my understanding of it. Once again, that would be an institutional impediment to success.
The second commandment has not been abrogated.
RWR
Swell
Posts: 2126
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:18 pm
Status: Offline

While I want a PE degree offered we do have sociology, religion,digital design.
Post Reply